Pages

I have been a whimsical child, and I have been an ardent Skeptic. I have read about every diet from Ornish to Paleo to the Blood Type Diet. I know Chiropractors and Naturopaths, and I make my living researching with Neurosurgeons. The only statement I feel comfortable saying to them all as it pertains to my position on health is this:

I believe in natural health, not in natural medicine. At any instant in evolutionary time, an organism is partially optimized to thrive in a certain milieu. Changes to that milieu can be very detrimental to the organism. Thus, the burden of proof falls on he who proposes that a change to the milieu is not detrimental, e.g. smoking cigarettes, eating cheesecake, drinking aspartame and sitting in a cushioned chair all day. This is not to be confused with the Naturalistic Fallacy. Not everything natural is healthy, and cures for diseases or trauma can only be expected to occur in nature under extremely unlikely circumstances. Likewise, one should be wary of any practitioner who pretends to know with certainly the diets of those who died 100,000 years hence.

This should not be construed as medical advice. As always, consult a physician before reading anything.

I'm going to come right out and say it: I don't care how many women or young girls become interested in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields. I don't care for the same reason I don't care how many men go into STEM or how many women become NFL head coaches.

All I care about, and what I think reasonable people everywhere should be working on, is ensuring that the young people in our lives are exposed to as many educational opportunities as possible during there formative years. I hope that every child has an opportunity to do some real work, to see how businesses run and how things are actually made before they make major decisions about how they are going to live their adult lives. I don't want anyone to be discouraged from going into STEM fields, or medicine, or the law. My wish for everyone is to find their passion and pursue it, which is antithetical in many ways to the classroom/factory model of schooling.

I saw the title of this report cited in Reason Magazine, "A Cascade of Failures: Why Government Fails, and How to Stop It." To me, the meaning of this sentence is wonderfully ambiguous. Most square pro-government types may be inclined to assume that the intention of the report is to provide guidance on how to stop government failures. I prefer to assume that it is aimed at stopping government, period.

I am not really sure why, but when people use the phrase "speak to" in place of "discuss" or "elaborate on" it really bothers me. I know there are cases when it is the most applicable phrase, but seriously, it drives me crazy.

I also am not a fan of the term "effect change." I understand that logically it makes sense, but it still bugs the crap out of me. I can also not accept someone being labeled an "agent of change."